United States Intercollegiate Lacrosse Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161613464
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Perry, NY, USA
Phone
5852375886
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$259,849
Expenses
$272,047
Assets
$115,643
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHUCK MITRANO (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • GENE MCCABE (BOARD MEMBER)
  • JASON ARCHBELL (BOARD MEMBER)
  • RUSSELL ROGERS (BOARD MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To enhance and develop intercollegiate lacrosse by providing leadership, management and services to its membership in order that the student-athletes, coaches and other constituent groups will realize the maximum benefit from the sport of lacrosse. The membership is comprised of universities and colleges which sponsor intercollegiate lacrosse for men. The association provides the following services to its membership: game officiating. Statistics, rankings and record keeping. Participation in sanctioned league play. Setting and enforcing standards of ethical play. Consideration of players for all-american recognition, individual awards and north-south all-star selection. Recognition of players, coaches and contributors.

What it reported doing in 2016

Observation of game officials in order to monitor the level of expertise and professionalism of the officials. The association used 31 observers to evaluate the performance of game officials in over 275 contests during the 2017 lacrosse season.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.6%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 86.6%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.7%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.6% of revenue deployed · 86.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $235K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.